Holeshot Stage 2 Kit vs Ivan's Jet Kit

[Desmo]

Meanwhile, I am OFFICIALLY ENDORSING THE HOLESHOT KIT!

Oh, I'm sure Dale is dancing with joy on that news.

[capitanoinsano]

Originally Posted by Falcon 269

Depends which kit you're referring to, the Slip-On or the MB kit.

I have tried a size larger on the MB kit mains and it made no discernible performance difference but increased fuel consumption marginally.

Seriously, after trying various size mains, needles positions, pilot jet sizes and mixture screw settings with both of Ivan's kits, on my own bike and others, I've concluded that Ivan's original parts and fitting instructions are the best way to go. The only reason I experimnted in the first place was because I could and because I was curious to see what might happen.

The drama you're attempting to stir up here is really juvenile. You're supposedly an intelligent, educated fella ... try acting like one. All this upper case shouting of your predictions is simply pathetic. Not impressed.

I have the Modified Air Box kit. I don't use uppercase to shout, just to stress key points as many don't have time to read all this stuff. I sure don't. At least I keep to one set of fonts and have no interest in colorful little smiley faces.

You are probably right about Ivan's kit being best. I like modified airboxes over pods, and out of the "airbox" thinking. He was right about the carb boot restriction. So OK, I am chaning my mind.... Ivan's kit, but without drilling rear bypass hole. That's my story and sticking to it.

So what size were the Modified Air box mains (if you have that info handy)?

I am running modded airbox but went back to stock exhaust header and Muzzy slip on. Liked the Muzzy full exhaust, but didn't like the lack of ground clearance. When I had the Muzzy full kit the front wheel would just start to skip along the ground while winding out 1st (and 2nd I think), using throttle only.

[capitanoinsano]

I found it elsewhere, the MB kit is 127.5 according to a forum post, but the stock ones are 130/132.5 (outer cyls/inner cyls). I'm thinking I may put all at 130. Otherwise, no complaints. I did find a post about a Holeshot user who had his mixture screws at just under 4 turns which supports the "don't drill the rear trans port hole" theory. Holeshot kit says no mods to trans ports (or pilot bypass holes) in their terminology.

[Whyme]

Originally Posted by capitanoinsano

Anyway, we traded bikes for a bit, and my exhaust/vapor trail smelled a hair lean at full throttle.

Wow, and to think all these years I've been reading spark plugs.....

[Pit]

Originally Posted by hooligan998

I agree with this except for the fact that the butterfly, when closed, does not 100% seal off the transition ports so hotly debated in this thread. So these ports still play a part in fuel delivery, even if it is minute, at idle. Their biggest impact is when the butterfly begins to open. But I've already hashed this out in previous posts.

Would you care to point out to me where I am partially wrong? I'm not saying that I am not, but I think I have a fairly good grasp on what is happening with these transition ports. So please, enlighten me where I may wrong. I will be man enough to admit where I have made a mistake, unlike certain other parties in this thread.

Well... this is a qualitative description... I don't think he meant a perfect seal by the butterfly valve.

I said you're partially right... the rest was a joke ... sorry
If I understood this correctly (big if), all the little holes supply emulsified fuel with the butterfly valve open... so you're right.

However, at idle, with the butterfly valve closed, the pressure in the small hole on the engine side has much lower pressure than the small hole on the slide side... and since they're interconnected, air is sucked through the hole on the slide side... yes ... air... which is supplied to the rest of the pilot circuit to "help" prep the emulsified fuel... at idle only...
does it make sense?
If it does, does it mean that at idle only Mr. Insano is right (or partially right)?

Anyway... I wouldn't question or criticize Ivan's or Holeshot's kits... they both have a pretty solid reputation and they both have tons of satisfied customers...

[Uncle Alpo]

I hate to break the news to you folks, but most of you - aside from those who know me - are stupid. Please refer to the difference between "stupid" and "ignorant."

Either provide quantitative data, or STFU.

Thank you for your contributions.






P.S. If you've never jetted a bike it's a great learning experience. Jump in. NOW. With both feet.

[Whyme]

***

[Ivan Krashn]

Originally Posted by Whyme

Wow, and to think all these years I've been reading spark plugs.....

Haven't you ever used a sniffer to determine proper air/fuel ratios? The Cap does.
" am running modded airbox but went back to stock exhaust header and Muzzy slip on. Liked the Muzzy full exhaust, but didn't like the lack of ground clearance. When I had the Muzzy full kit the front wheel would just start to skip along the ground while winding out 1st (and 2nd I think), using throttle only."

Funny, with stock airbox and filter, Ivan's SO kit with drilled transition ports and stock header with exup valve, my FZ sends the front wheel sky high with throttle only in 1st, in 2nd will pull up at about 7500 and continue coming up until I run out of nerve, and come up briefly shifting to 3rd at near 100mph.

Point is, all this exhaust sniffing, front wheel lifting subjective observation is just that, subjective. If you're so intent on proving your theory(ies) back them up with some quantifiable data. I'd love to see back to back dyno pulls with fueling data, O2 sniffer data, something. Otherwise I don't see how you're helping any body. I certainly don't want to downgrade performance to the Muzzy + MB kit level. Up to now you,re just blowing smoke, which apparently smells a little lean. You have raised some interesting points and stimulated lots interesting responses. Time to take it to the next level, eh? Otherwise you're just
Here's a nice smiley face for ya!

[gotfz1]

Man I never knew the Muzzys had clearance issues. I must not have leaned my gen1 enough. And good thing I'm scared of anything but paved, clean roads.

[Falcon 269]

Originally Posted by capitanoinsano

I'm thinking I may put all at 130.

I did find a post about a Holeshot user who had his mixture screws at just under 4 turns which supports the "don't drill the rear trans port hole" theory. Holeshot kit says no mods to trans ports (or pilot bypass holes) in their terminology.

Holeshot also supplies 17.5 pilots for use in some applications, I believe. I can't recall which but it doesn't do much to support your pilot bypass theory either way.

I've done 130 mains and it's pointless. That's with an Akra full system, too. But go ahead and try it yourself.

Can't see a selection of dyno pulls telling us anything worthwhile in respect of the Great Pilot Bypass Hole debate.

In the meantime, be careful not to overdo the exhaust sniffing. Brain damage may occur.

[hooligan998]

Originally Posted by Pit

However, at idle, with the butterfly valve closed, the pressure in the small hole on the engine side has much lower pressure than the small hole on the slide side... and since they're interconnected, air is sucked through the hole on the slide side... yes ... air... which is supplied to the rest of the pilot circuit to "help" prep the emulsified fuel... at idle only...
does it make sense?

Okay, I do understand what you are saying, but this is the part I have disagreed with all along, and seems to be along the same lines as the cap'n's thinking (please, no offense intended here). At idle, both the transition ports at the butterfly are at lower pressures, you are correct about that. But even with one port at a lower pressure than the other, they still do not suck air in because they are both at a higher pressure due to the fact that these ports are fed from the float bowl, which is, at the very least, at ambient atmospheric pressure, which is a higher pressure than what is being seen inside the throat of the carb at either port. Therefore, each port is supplying the emulsified mixture into the airstream, however minimal it may be. The one that has the greatest effect here is the actual idle mixture port, the one with the mixture screw and the only one not drilled in the Ivan's kit (I just felt a need to clarify that). When the throttle is cracked and the butterflies begin to open is when these transition ports come into play and have a much greater effect. Hence the reason for the enlargment. It is to reduce the factory induced lean condition stumbling off idle. Consequently, an over rich conditon, caused by over enlargment, will cause the same symptoms. You can clearly see I did not contradict myself here, as was mentioned in an earlier post. One condition is lean, one condition is right, and one condition is over rich. The former and the latter will both cause the same symptom.

By the way, I understand you meant no offense in your post and none was taken. I have actually learned from this thread as a result of other posts in here. I hope others will too.

[-Dash-]

Please, oh please! Would someone let me know what I should do while waiting for Captain Tangent's INCREDIBLE ANNOUNCEMENT!

Im all a 'tizzy! Should I hold my breath? Maybe I shouldnt go to work! I can stay glued to all the news networks to catch the BIG NEWS!

Im going to stock up on water and canned goods too! I cant wait for my world to be rocked!!

So much to do! So much to doooo!

[Whyme]

[Bad Moon]

Originally Posted by capitanoinsano

...after a good ride the other day ...

Was this on The Loop?

[capitanoinsano]

Originally Posted by hooligan998

Okay, I do understand what you are saying, but this is the part I have disagreed with all along, and seems to be along the same lines as the cap'n's thinking (please, no offense intended here). At idle, both the transition ports at the butterfly are at lower pressures, you are correct about that. But even with one port at a lower pressure than the other, they still do not suck air in because they are both at a higher pressure due to the fact that these ports are fed from the float bowl, which is, at the very least, at ambient atmospheric pressure, which is a higher pressure than what is being seen inside the throat of the carb at either port. Therefore, each port is supplying the emulsified mixture into the airstream, however minimal it may be. The one that has the greatest effect here is the actual idle mixture port, the one with the mixture screw and the only one not drilled in the Ivan's kit (I just felt a need to clarify that). When the throttle is cracked and the butterflies begin to open is when these transition ports come into play and have a much greater effect. Hence the reason for the enlargment. It is to reduce the factory induced lean condition stumbling off idle. Consequently, an over rich conditon, caused by over enlargment, will cause the same symptoms. You can clearly see I did not contradict myself here, as was mentioned in an earlier post. One condition is lean, one condition is right, and one condition is over rich. The former and the latter will both cause the same symptom.

By the way, I understand you meant no offense in your post and none was taken. I have actually learned from this thread as a result of other posts in here. I hope others will too.

Here's the problem... Define "fed". Feeding would be the flow from higher pressure to lower pressure. The 3 trans port holes are all in a chamber that is fed in one direction by the idle air jet and then goes past the pilot jet, then past the mixture screw. But the problem is that both the idle air jet and the rear transition port are both on the air box side of the butterflies. Yes there is a slide behind the rear trans port, but there is a gap for air flow. So the pilot circuit is actually fed from both ends at once. One higher pressure (near atmospheric) is at the idle air jet, the other is the rear transition port. So yes, you will have some air sucked into the rear transition port for the same reason it is sucked into the idle air jet (the opening the carb designer INTENDED to dictate the amount of air flow into). So the rear trans port has always been an "air leak" at closed throttle and barely open throttle, but not after the butterfly rotates enough for the rear trans port to be on the engine side of the butterfly. So, given that it is an "air leak" it is a not exactly a good idea to make it bigger. Ivan should have just said to enlarge the middle to the specified drill bit size, OR maybe even enlarge the middle one more with a bigger drill bit. But I disagree with enlarging the rear one as it forces the user to run 5+ turns out on mixture (for typical modded air box and slip on), whereas if you don't do it, you get to run at about 4 turns out, due to the leaning effect.

This leaning effect is not just at closed throttle, it includes a few degrees above closed throttle. That is why the rear port enlargement ruined my carburetors and caused a nasty dead spot under load. I probably had one carb that was at one end of the spectrum of parts tolerances, and the enlarged rear port pushed my carbs over the cliff and to a landfill.

[capitanoinsano]

Originally Posted by Ivan Krashn

Haven't you ever used a sniffer to determine proper air/fuel ratios? The Cap does.
" am running modded airbox but went back to stock exhaust header and Muzzy slip on. Liked the Muzzy full exhaust, but didn't like the lack of ground clearance. When I had the Muzzy full kit the front wheel would just start to skip along the ground while winding out 1st (and 2nd I think), using throttle only."

Funny, with stock airbox and filter, Ivan's SO kit with drilled transition ports and stock header with exup valve, my FZ sends the front wheel sky high with throttle only in 1st, in 2nd will pull up at about 7500 and continue coming up until I run out of nerve, and come up briefly shifting to 3rd at near 100mph.

Point is, all this exhaust sniffing, front wheel lifting subjective observation is just that, subjective. If you're so intent on proving your theory(ies) back them up with some quantifiable data. I'd love to see back to back dyno pulls with fueling data, O2 sniffer data, something. Otherwise I don't see how you're helping any body. I certainly don't want to downgrade performance to the Muzzy + MB kit level. Up to now you,re just blowing smoke, which apparently smells a little lean. You have raised some interesting points and stimulated lots interesting responses. Time to take it to the next level, eh? Otherwise you're just
Here's a nice smiley face for ya!

Yes if I give full throttle off the line and popped the clutch, I am sure I could flip the bike over backwards. It would make a cool YouTube video, but wouldn't be worth the damage or potential medical bills. I am referring to a conservative take off and gradually going to full throttle once you are past the flip over backwards region. I have noticed that heavier riders wheely easier, especially when leaning back. I tend to lean forward as I am trying to accelerate fast, not make cool YouTube videos.

With the full Muzzy kit there was a power peak at about 8-9k that would make the front wheel lift off, and it was a bit unexpected (adds to fun I guess). I lost some of that when I put the stock header back on.

Regarding ground clearance. I like to zip around town some, and occasionally cut across a parking lot and like to be able to ease the bike over a concrete step between lots. With the stock header and my RaceTech springs I can do that without bottoming out. If I had a dollar for every mashed 4-1 collector I have seen over the years, I would...well... I would still keep the 2003 FZ1, as I like it better than the new models.

Another reason is road debris. I have had road/highway debris bang against a 4-1 collector before. The stock header is higher, sturdier and retains the nice EXUP thingy.

[capitanoinsano]

Ok, this sounds like an intelligent thing to compare:

What is the main jet size that Holeshot supplies (pod kit and/or K&N filter) as compared to the main jet that Ivan's kit supplies for the modified air box kit?

I already know Ivan's kit uses a 127.5 main (1-2 sizes smaller than stock) for the modified air box kit and I think 122.5 for the stock air box kit (correct me if wrong) So a really good question at this point is, what size does the Holeshot kit use?

The main jet and needle work together till about 3/4 throttle (as far as I know), but above that, I think its mainly the main jet and emulstion tube that dictate the mixture (for a given intake and exhaust setup). So if these kits are both great, they should be similar right?

Oh and yes I know, checking plugs is the best way to tell for sure, but when adjusting main jets you would have to leave the throttle wide open a while under load, and I don't live near the Utah Salt Flats, nor do I have a sniffer, and I want to be on the safe side, so when I noticed a change of exhaust scent at WOT, it made me a little concerned, especially when Ivan's main jets are 1-2 sizes smaller than stock, and that is highly unusual to find in a carb kit (smaller rather than bigger to compensate for free flowing intake/exhaust)

[hooligan998]

Cap'n...you ever put a set of sychro guages on a set of carbs? They hook into the vacuum ports on top of the intake ports downstream of the slide. What kind of reading do you get? You normally get readings that are in "hg for mercury guages, or inches of water for other types. Both measure a vacuum that is being created inside the throat of the carb by the action of the piston moving down in the cylinder. This is all being felt from the slide back, and therefore on both sides of the butterfly, which is on the engine side of the slide. The entrance for the air jet is on the airbox side of the slide, therefore at a higher pressure, and this feeds into the pilot jet which draws fuel from the float bowl to emulsify the mix. These transition ports are not fed from both ends and just do not suck air from the carb throat back into the pilot circuit.

[Falcon 269]

Originally Posted by capitanoinsano

So if these kits are both great, they should be similar right?

Err, one uses stock needles (single taper) mounted higher (a compromise), while the other uses multi-taper needles designed to provide optimum fuelling at any given throttle setting.

The needle tip on Ivan's is much narrower than the stock needle, so main jets sizes won't be comparable.

[capitanoinsano]

Originally Posted by hooligan998

Cap'n...you ever put a set of sychro guages on a set of carbs? They hook into the vacuum ports on top of the intake ports downstream of the slide. What kind of reading do you get? You normally get readings that are in "hg for mercury guages, or inches of water for other types. Both measure a vacuum that is being created inside the throat of the carb by the action of the piston moving down in the cylinder. This is all being felt from the slide back, and therefore on both sides of the butterfly, which is on the engine side of the slide. The entrance for the air jet is on the airbox side of the slide, therefore at a higher pressure, and this feeds into the pilot jet which draws fuel from the float bowl to emulsify the mix. These transition ports are not fed from both ends and just do not suck air from the carb throat back into the pilot circuit.

Yes I use a Morgan Carb Tune. Here's the problem: The synch ports are barbs on the top of the carb boots (intake manifold rubbers). They are on the engine side of the butterfly. That is the vacuum you are measuring when you synch, and the butterflies are almost closed, so there is a big difference in pressure between the engine side of the butterfly and the air box side of the butterfly. It is like dropping voltage across a resistor (a flow resistance is the analog of an electrical resistance). There are 2 openings to the pilot circuit it the almost closed butterfly condition. One is the idle air jet, the other is the rear transition port. If the butterflies had been much thicker it would not be on the wrong side, but it is. Take a look at any Mikuni BS34 family of carburetors or a set of the FZ1 carbs. Same situation